Download and run the Unreal Engine 4 Elemental benchmark demo on your PC

This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

You know that amazing Unreal Engine 4 “Elemental” demo that’s been wowing us ever since GDC 2012? You can now download it and run it on your own PC. There are very few games that currently use UE4 (they’re all in the pipeline for release later in 2014 and 2015), so it’s a good opportunity to see how your gaming PC’s hardware deals with a next-gen engine. And yes, there is a built-in FPS counter — and I expect you all to share your rig’s FPS in the comments!

UE4 Elemental demo, frost dude. Click to zoom in.

How to run the Unreal Engine 4 Elemental demo on your PC

First things first, we’re not entirely sure where these files came from. We know that they’re bundled with the Unreal Engine SDK that Unreal recently made available for a very cheap monthly fee. I suspect that someone with the SDK packaged up Elemental, uploaded it to Mediafire, and then a bunch of gaming forums (notably NeoGAF) picked it up. The files aren’t legit, but as they don’t contain any of the source code Unreal probably isn’t too bothered.

You may have to install the Visual C++ 2013 redist runtime (vcredist2013_x64.exe for 64-bit CPUs or vcredist2013_x86.exe for 32-bit CPUs)

Navigate to Elemental > Binaries, and then choose the right folder for your CPU (probably Win64)

Run Elemental.exe

If you get stuck, Alt-F4 should close the demo

When the demo is running, use tilde ~ to open up the console. Stat FPS shows the FPS counter. SetRes 1920x1080 (or whatever) lets you set the resolution. For other settings, such as vsync, you need to visit Elemental > Saved > Config > WidnowsNoEditor and edit GameUserSettings.ini.

In full-screen mode it’s very hard to take screenshots (you’ll probably just get a black window). Screnshotting works in windowed mode, but I struggled to get the engine to reliably open up in a window.

UE4 Effects Cave demo. This one lowered my average FPS to around 30, at 1920×1200.

Five more Unreal Engine tech demos

Along with the Elemental demo, which I’m sure will be used for benchmarking, some other UE4 demos have leaked out. NeoGAF posted links to a couple of demos, but TechPowerUp has again done an excellent job of packaging up five demos and posting them on a high-speed mirror. The TechPowerUp package includes the Effects Cave, Realistic Rendering, Reflections, Shooter Game, and Temple Mobile demos. These demos actually allow you to walk around and move the camera.

UE4 Elemental demo, with the fire dude outside his fiery citadel of fire

Let the benchmarking commence!

So, load up the Elemental demo, type in the Stat FPS console command, and check out your FPS.

On my own rig — Core i7-4770K @ 4.3GHz, GeForce 760 GTX — I generally averaged around 45 FPS at 1920×1200. The big frost dude towards the end of the demo (pictured top) brought me down to around 25 FPS. Let me know in the comments what FPS your gaming rig gets.

I have no idea if antialiasing was turned on (there’s no options for it in the INI file at least). It’s also worth noting that the demo was compiled by some random dude on the internet, so it probably isn’t representative of finalized, fully optimized code. Still, it is rather pretty, and a very good indicator of how UE4 games will run on modern gaming PCs.

It’s worth pointing out that UE4 is also coming to the PS4 and Xbox One. Sadly (but understandably) it won’t look as good on the consoles — most notably, on the PS4, global illumination has been disabled, significantly reducing the “realism” of scenes (see video below). We still haven’t seen UE4 running on the Xbox One, but it’s unlikely to look any better than on the PS4.

My point still stands. This year’s “it” game Titanfall promised a lot of things. Instead we got the return of of the bunnyhopping cheat via jetpack and faux bezel lines when you get inside the giant robots.

Phobos

you forgot to mention the whopping 50GB of space it needs.

Angel Ham

And that’s becoming the norm now. And the excuse for that is “Uncompressed sound is better!” but that’s B.S. since the real reason is to deter piracy by keeping the game’s install files bigger than the monthly data cap limits.

Phobos

yes, that is absolutely massive proportions of BS of an excuse. A lot of games linger in the 20-30GB and honestly they are very short. I don’t know what’s going on with developers today.

Angel Ham

The bullet shots don’t sound that good in real life. That’s beef that I have with FPS, they give ammo that ominous “BOOM” sound when shot. But living in one of the most violent nations in the world are constantly reminding me that they rather sound like cheap firecrackers.

Daniellynet

I don’t mind the size.
What bothers me is that the games are big, but the textures still look like poo…

Angel Ham

That’s because the uncompressed sound files are the ones eating up all that space. As if people who nuke their eardrums with loud music have a fine-tuned hearing..

Daniellynet

“…but that’s B.S. since the real reason is to deter piracy by keeping the
game’s install files bigger than the monthly data cap limits.”
Uh, what?
That would deter people from buying the game digitally too.

Also, not everyone has data limits/absurdly low data limits like in the US.

Angel Ham

The USA IS the main market audience for these games. Everybody else is just an afterthought.

Roger Skullestad

*Laughs and runs back to Europe* – what does data limit even MEAN?

Phobos

That’s how most fps games are today, heck not 2007 more like 1999.

Angel Ham

They’re all terrible I tell you. If it’s futuristic, then we get a “It’s like Halo-but-with” game; if it’s set on something close to this time then we get a “It’s like CoD-but-with” game.

Phobos

The replay value is gone, now we are stuck with, it looks pretty but that’s it. It’s a lot worse in the PC department with console ports. The only game that seems to depart from the rest its BioShock infinite and even then the game play style looks like a rip off from Clive Barkers Undying, a game from 98.

Angel Ham

I’ve been waiting for years to see the environment do more than just being pretty. So far water and wind still do nothing but keep things prettier and no matter how rough the terrain looks the characters still walk over it as if there’s nothing but a flat, solid surface.

Phobos

Funny how they don’t dare to do something different but instead do more of the same. I think one of the Metroid’s game from the GameCube used to have light and shadow gameplay it look interesting.

It’s not funny. It’s business. And it’s depressing.
We get the same shit year after year because it sells year after year.
None of them are prepared to invest in new technologies because they think they won’t get the return.
This is why I get so mad when someone buys COD… again…
It’s up to the consumer to ignore shit and support quality.
Therefore, we’ve already lost.

Angel Ham

IIRC, Kotick said that the reason CoD remained mostly the same nowadays was that it “evolved” from a FPS to a “Sports” game and because of it they were limited as to what they could do.

That’s such a terrible excuse.
Basically the derpy fan base would cry too hard if it changed too much?
Sports games are even worse. Football is the same every year, and yet they can sell a barely different copy every year at full price.
The sooner that kind of bullshit is rejected, the better.
As I said, it won’t change, because the majority who buy it are oblivious to how software works, and aren’t even aware that they’re buying what could have simply been a big patch.
Don’t expect the publisher to change their ways, because MONEY.
argh, so mad!!

Phobos

They are just lazy, that’s their excuse. They keep milking the same cow. But I don’t know who to hate more them or the people that keeps buying their awful games. Epic use to be one of my favorite pc game makers now that is all gone. Its strange that no one in the media ask them why their games are so terrible, yes I know they make their money from consoles but from the pc view they pretty much castrate the games.

I believe they are still using the same engine from Quake 3, heavily modify though. But yeah don’t get me stared on CoD games.

Sam Kostka

To be fair, so do many other companies.
Valve’s Source engine is mostly based on Quake 1 with a few lines of 2 and 3.

Phobos

I believe they are still using the same engine from Quake 3, heavily modify though. But yeah don’t get me stared on CoD games.

Phobos

Consumers are like drug addicts, you need to offer them something stronger or they will take the same shit for a long time.

Alfred

I would be happy if they went back to 2000 gameplay with Unreal Tournament. That is the best game out there to date.

Phobos

I doubt I can run the demo, way too demanding seen how Sebastian’s pc struggle, maybe in two years when I upgrade my video card. It would be nice if you guys could bench the demo with different cpu’s and gpu’s.

omega5384

Im running a 4770k @ 4.4ghz and a gtx 780 @ 1140 core and 6.4ghz mem. I’ll run the bench when I get off work and post it here for you

Some of them more impressive in my opinion than the Elemental demo. Specially because you can actually walk around. Anyway the graphics evolution is clear.
Obviously it’s up to developers to combine graphics with all other elements that make a great game. These demos also prove that even a mid range PC can handle console next gen graphics. I have tried the demos with a GTX 670 and all demos ran fine and were quite enjoyable. Indeed a new console generation was needed since the old one was clearly outdated. It’s good news for everyone as finally PC gamers will be able to take greater advantage of their hardware.

From what I can tell, the major gameplay change we can expect in some games, is physics and particle effects affecting gameplay in a greater way. When done right, this can lead to scenarios that were previously impossible to accomplish with old tech.

What is clear is that none of these demos push high end cards to the limits. And I know some people expected more from “next gen”. True, For the price consoles are sold, I think it’s a disappointment. Consoles are not cheap. $400 is just the starting price. Games are more expensive. There are hidden fees to access content such as playing online. They are closed devices and so on and so on. Both Sony and Microsoft could have sold consoles with better hardware and they would still profit from all the added services being sold on their closed devices.
I have bought both PS4 and Xbox One, but in all honesty, if value is what people are looking for, buy a PC. If you really want to play console exclusive titles, buy your favorite consoles but don’t make the mistake of buying the other competing console. Wait a bit longer and buy a mid range PC later this year that will be a lot more powerful than any console, provide you with a lot more content, cheaper games and so on.

I expect games to look even better in the next few years. Indeed we will start to see games with a level of photorealism that competes with pre rendered CGI.

James

I’m not an advocate of consoles by any means (I have an Xbox 360 that I got a couple years after its debut), but I think for $400-600, you aren’t going to do much better with a PC from scratch. When you factor in the requirements of all the necessary components (motherboard, video card, processor, RAM, hard drive), a $600 PC isn’t necessarily going to provide a “high end” gaming experience. In addition to that, when comparing baseline prices vs performance, you’d still need peripherals, a case, and perhaps an operating system assuming this is a legitimate fresh build.

That being said, obviously PCs have a much higher potential with the added benefit of future upgrades. A console could be outdated in a matter of a couple years whereas your PC could still be a mid-range device that can be upgraded without the necessity to purchase a new case, peripherals, and all new hardware (assuming you take proper care).

I’m an avid PC user, but that’s because I grew up with them. If by chance that didn’t happen and my first introduction to the gaming world was an ‘all-in-one’ unit that could play a wide array of modern games – albeit with lesser performance/graphics – at an affordable price.. Let’s just say that I can see why consoles are so prominent.

I agree with you though. For overall and long-term value, a PC wins by a landslide. The myriad of additional options and flexibility itself proves worthy.

Alfred

I happened to make a $600 price point rig to destroy consoles prior to reading this comment. I just thought you might like to see it (and others)https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Weak1ings/saved/4DVV
I have dubbed it the “Console Dominator Class”
for $500 it would be “Console Killer Class”

This build will be able to max out games though using the older HD 7870 Ghz edition (HD 7870 is on PS4) The build should in theory provide significantly better results. The CPU operates at twice the speed of the Octo-core APU of the Consoles.

The Console vs PC boils down to this:
Locked vs Unlocked.
Freedom vs Control.
Master of the Machine vs Machine Masters you by some big corp.
Pre-built vs Custom.
Under the hood they are very similar but when you go a bit higher you can realize just what each platform is and represents.

James

I agree with your comparisons. I was hasty to judge the current generation’s capabilities because my current rig was originally built back in 2010 and I’ve since upgraded individual components. My idea of a $600 rig isn’t quite up to par with the budget builds available today. I definitely side with the PC market and all of the freedom that comes with it. Though, when it comes to freedom, those who aren’t familiar will still be enticed by the relative ease of purchasing a pre-made console with its own operating system and can still play the games that they’re looking for (albeit with lesser performance and visual superiority).

Made some modifications to some of the ini files and much better quality… Nice to see how the engine scaled for my machine and gfx card.

All FPS was dropped by another 5 to 10 frames and a lot of frame skippage was happening at the end but the quality was a lot better. The engine introduced fuzzy details which you see purposely implemented in Unreal Tournament 2007 (unreal 3 engine).

Not sure why these made such a difference as it was already full screen with ALT ENTER but something strange with refresh and size was going on (1920×1080 @ 50p ??) but the below changes fixed that.

IMO: The attention to detail, lighting and effect transitioning in both the Realistic rendering and Temple demos are better than the mountain fire and ice giant demos.

The cave demo is good, but the only part I found impressive on that was the lighting exiting the cave (which is incorrect for the weather conditions btw) and the wind snow, ice and blizzard effect, with fire blowing in a set wind direction).

Yowan Rdotexe

Is it just me or are the textures not set to high quality? The whole demo seems a bit too fancy and way off compared to current games.

Steve Smith

i7 2600
GTX 760
12gb ram
Most of the demo I was seeing in the mid 50’s and the mid 40’s. At the end with the ice giant, the frames touched 28fps, for just a second, but was hovering around 33fps in that last ice segment, for the most part.

1. Obviously not.
2. Bad example with crysis, that was PC first and always looked stunning, then they tried to get it working on 360/PS3 for crysis 2.
Better examples: Dark souls, tomb raider, bioshock, dead island, call of duty. You see?

Weston Konik

yeah. that is true. certain games have no excuses, so they should look good. Star Citizen for example. the new consoles should help a lot in the next couple of years.

i mean the ps4 hardware compared to the ps3…. mind boggling. so if most games ARE ports, PC games should be looking a lot better, real fast.

also, you should have mentioned the most notorious…. Skyrim :P vanilla skyrim on pc looks dreadful lol. if you have a pc, you BEST be using mods on skyrim. :P

pixelstuff

Core i7 920 @ 2.67Ghz, GeForce 560Ti

Average started out at 25fps with it hitting 20 fps anytime the super fine particles appear like doors blowing open or the eyes lighting up the first time. Then it dropped way down to 10fps at the end with the frost creature.

There are smoother demos also, but the real issue for me is that there is no SLI atm… so you know what that means….

Weston Konik

yeah, and the 4way sli might be hurting you. i have seen tons of benchmarks of actual games where 4way SLI/crossfire render LESS fps than 2way…..

maybe try another test just running 1 690? =) see if there is any difference.

Scott

As per Sebastian’s request- Im running this demo on an nVidia 765m, tucked inside of a heavily upgraded Asus G750JW- and I cant touch it at full HD. If it were a game, for me, it becomes playable at 720p- lowest framerate was around 28FPS, average about 40FPS.

After messing with the demo for a bit I discovered a few more things:
-You can use F9 to take screenshots (Saved in the ElementalSavedScreenShotsWindowsNoEditor folder)
-You can toggle a lot of visual effects and debug rendering using the “Show” command (Such as post processing)
-Slomo can be used to change the animation speed
-RestartLevel and Exit commands are much more useful than Alt+F4 and restarting the demo

My system is running with 3 GTX Titans in SLI and the demo only utilized one GPU which was very disappointing. As well, I couldnt figure out how to turn of vSync (The option in the config file didnt seem to do anything) so my demo ran at 60 FPS consistently.

Ah cool! Good info, especially about the SLI (another commenter confirmed the same thing). I assume that’s just because SLI has to be enabled for specific games, though, right? In the drivers? It’s not surprising that Nvidia hasn’t added this leaked demo to their drivers yet :)

Mike

After I posted my comment I thought the same thing and spent some time messing with the Nvidia control panel and could not get any of the demos to utilize more than one GPU. However, since this is not an official or supported piece of software its not surprising. Im sure that Nvidia/Unreal will have multi-GPU support working for any official demo or game release.

Thanks for writing up the article by the way.

Mike

After I posted my comment I thought the same thing and spent some time messing with the Nvidia control panel and could not get any of the demos to utilize more than one GPU. However, since this is not an official or supported piece of software its not surprising. Im sure that Nvidia/Unreal will have multi-GPU support working for any official demo or game release.

Thanks for writing up the article by the way.

Mirimon

why titans instead of 690’s?, Sure they have better noise reduction and energy usage, but in all, card to card, underperform. (with exception to better sli performance due to higher vram capability, I run my 690’s displaying to 3 84″ screens (xbr84x900’s to be exact)

Mike

I agree with you. However, my 3 Titans were purchased for me by my employer to do general purpose GPU programming. We chose the Titans since they are a lot cheaper than 3 K20x. However, Im not complaining since I got a free computer with 3xTitans, Core i7-4930K and 64 GB of RAM.

I like NVIDIA products and service support, BUT.. I can’t help but get the feeling they have already, long since, developed better tech and are simply releasing in intervals to milk money.. While AMD certainly garnered more GFX business with the 8th gen consoles, Nvidia seems as though they could have wiped out the competition a while ago.

I haven’t played with any new cpu’s lately, last time I upgraded to a dual platform mobo and tested between the 3960x and the 3770k when it was new, of course the 3960x still performed better and I haven’t looked back.perhaps this year when the console stuff winds down I will refocus on PC tech again for some cross platform api’s.

I like NVIDIA products and service support, BUT.. I can’t help but get the feeling they have already, long since, developed better tech and are simply releasing in intervals to milk money.. While AMD certainly garnered more GFX business with the 8th gen consoles, Nvidia seems as though they could have wiped out the competition a while ago.

I haven’t played with any new cpu’s lately, last time I upgraded to a dual platform mobo and tested between the 3960x and the 3770k when it was new, of course the 3960x still performed better and I haven’t looked back.perhaps this year when the console stuff winds down I will refocus on PC tech again for some cross platform api’s.

Mike

I agree with you. However, my 3 Titans were purchased for me by my employer to do general purpose GPU programming. We chose the Titans since they are a lot cheaper than 3 K20x. However, Im not complaining since I got a free computer with 3xTitans, Core i7-4930K and 64 GB of RAM.

Mirimon

why titans instead of 690’s?, Sure they have better noise reduction and energy usage, but in all, card to card, underperform. (with exception to better sli performance due to higher vram capability, I run my 690’s displaying to 3 84″ screens (xbr84x900’s to be exact)

it really isn’t all that hard, I did a build costing only $384 and still outperformed the xb1 (thanks no doubt to the fact that extra gddr5 ram is inherent in pc builds that the xb1 does not have)….it really is a shame people think it’s hot shite…

chojin999

The Unreal Engine 4 will be far from polished for the next 5-6 months. It’s available to developers but Epic Games itself clearly wrote on the website that it’s going to take them 6 months to offer a complete polished product.
So all games built with Unreal Engine 4 for now will run slower and have bugs that will be fixed in the coming months.
This demo being slower than expected now it’s quite obvious then.

Phobos

Just like the Unreal Engine 3. The question is, is the Unreal Engine 4 meant for consoles and the pc is just a afterthought?

chojin999

Meant for consoles? I really don’t think so. The main development platform is on PCs. And it’s one of the best and most advanced 3D engines (if not the best one) on the market. Consoles development doesn’t even seem to be supported on the public version so far than freelance developers can cheaply rent, although the Crytek engine is cheaper because they don’t ask a percentage of the profit to developers but the Crytek supports PC and consoles only, no iOS nor Android yet.
Unreal Engine 4 supports PC, iOS, Android, OS X. There is direct support to publish the compiled games PC versions on Steam too.

Phobos

What about the demo that runs on the ps4? Got to admit that cheap apu you always bash pull very close to the PC version, though the PC version only upper hand were the extra particles.

Medallish

Well he honestly said in a post somewhere that Next Gen should be able to pull 4K :|. So yeah I doubt he’ll ever concede the PS4 is perfectly fine.

Phobos

Coming from Chojin999, he’s just hilarious.

Phobos

What about the demo that runs on the ps4? Got to admit that cheap apu you always bash pull very close to the PC version, though the PC version only upper hand were the extra particles.

Phobos

Just like the Unreal Engine 3. The question is, is the Unreal Engine 4 meant for consoles and the pc is just a afterthought?

I have run Windows resource monitor during one run and it shows that this demo only use 4 CPU cores, other 4 cores are parked and idle. 4 cores in use never exceeded 50% load.

Dozerman

My primary rig is broken down right now, but the computer I’m about to sell is 1280×1024 with an 8150 and a 7770. In the benchmark before my mother-in-law wakes up and the tapestries are blowing around, I’m getting about 30-34. After my mother-in-law wakes up and grabs her hammer, it starts plummeting. The part where she wakes up my aunt barley pushes 15.

Yeah, UE4 apparently hates AMD. I think I’m more exited about the new CryEngine, anyways.

noticeably less particle effects on ps4 vs pc… but that gap between graphical appearance has never been closer. Good job Sony..

ScarySandwichMan

Actually, when the 360 launched in 2005, it was a bit more powerful than the discrete desktop GPUs. The ps4 is less than HALF as powerful this time.

Mirimon

what do you mean, “discrete” desktop gpu’s?
AGP was on it’s way to the grave at the time, and the new format opf cards from both nvidia and ATI were hitting hard, the progressions in gpu’s began to really ramp up at this point, leaving the 7th gen consoles far in the past. If you mean to compare against integrated graphics controllers, then yes… but the common card found in most gaming rigs was certainly well above the x1900/8800gt type found in the 360.

Mirimon

noticeably less particle effects on ps4 vs pc… but that gap between graphical appearance has never been closer. Good job Sony..

going to be upgrading to pirate islands gpu next year and already got 4770k but havn’t built system yet. but still tests my current rig and liked the eye candy alot now all it needs is built in benchmark to show average fps and compare scores :)

It doesn’t work for me. I can only see a black window for a few second and ear the sound. I am running whit the catalyst 14.4 beta driver. my pc spec is: cpu amd fx-6300 @4.1GHz,
gpu xfx r9 270x dd ghost, ram g.skill sniper @1866MHz. Anyone can help me?

Steve Smith

Did you install the: vcredist2013_x64.exe for 64-bit CPUs or vcredist2013_x86.exe for 32-bit ? They’re in the folder. I installed both.

David Dante Matějovič

when i try to run it and compare it to the video, my version looks like the ps4 one, any idea why that is?

ScarySandwichMan

Yeah me too. In the video, there is a part that is a PC only part, but it is NOT in the Demo that the download contains. I think this is just the ps4 demo download.

ScarySandwichMan

The Elemental Demo seems to be the ps4 version. If you watch the video in the article, the PS4 side is the demo that you can download. Not sure why this is.

Nick

Same here, I can tell the difference even though I have the full 1080p PS4 version and the compressed PC verison picture and I can STILL tell a HUGE difference. I want the PC verison as well.

satibel

I5 3210m, gt650m 2Gb, 8go ram@ 1600mhz, I am running between 15 and 25 fps, with a drop at 10 on the Ice elemental

Yes, finally someone with a 770. I might download it tonight and see if my i5-4670 makes any difference compared to your 8350

Jonathan Gallagher

Take into account this, it used a max of 40% of my CPU when running…. Its a lot in 8-core processor at 4.2Ghz…

Megaman1574

Mine ended up mostly the same as yours and it used no more than 50% cpu.

BlacKHeaDSg10

By pressing tilde doesn’t bring any console or fps for me …..

YOUDIEMOFO

I want SLI support and 60fps lock taken off and maybe I’ll be thinking of buying games with this engine……. Until then I don’t think so. I can’t stand when they do this to a tech demo. These are supposed to showcase the “power” and potential of an engine. Not how the creator has limited it for show.

These actually run like crap “fidelity” wise that is. Tearing all over the screen and my system barely drops below 40+FPS (using “one” card) but the tearing is there all throughout even at the locked 62fps I get. Still not sure, but it does seem as though this engine has less of an overhead when compared to others that have come preciously, but I could be wrong.

I just can not wait for Nvidia’s G-Sync on some 4k monitors……….. It’ll be all it over then!

YOUDIEMOFO

I want SLI support and 60fps lock taken off and maybe I’ll be thinking of buying games with this engine……. Until then I don’t think so. I can’t stand when they do this to a tech demo. These are supposed to showcase the “power” and potential of an engine. Not how the creator has limited it for show.

These actually run like crap “fidelity” wise that is. Tearing all over the screen and my system barely drops below 40+FPS (using “one” card) but the tearing is there all throughout even at the locked 62fps I get. Still not sure, but it does seem as though this engine has less of an overhead when compared to others that have come preciously, but I could be wrong.

I just can not wait for Nvidia’s G-Sync on some 4k monitors……….. It’ll be all it over then!

iamserious

Damn my computer runs this demo at 30 fps until the ice dude scene then it drops to just under 20fps!!! Of course I’m working with dated hardware (Q9650 and HD6970).

Moises Domínguez

it is so bad ass

seeafish

Got pretty much consistent 55fps for the most of it. Dipped to mid-40s when he smashed the hammer and all that shizzle, and finally around 37-45 with the ice dude.
On GTX970 OC and intel 4790 3.60Ghz.

isolated1 Ray

How do you uncap fps using the unreal engine 4 .ini files. I tried the following:

bSmoothFrameRate=true

MinSmoothedFrameRate=5

MaxSmoothedFrameRate=144

but it didn’t work.

This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

ExtremeTech Newsletter

Subscribe Today to get the latest ExtremeTech news delivered right to your inbox.